Check out our official podcast, Morrus’ Unofficial Tabletop RPG Talk! A podcast all about the latest tabletop roleplaying game news! From D&D and Pathfinder to the latest indie games, it won't necessarily be accurate, or informative, or even competent, but we will try to have fun!

Product Reviews & Ratings

Monday, 15th April, 2013

Totally parroting what pemerton said. Back when I ran Planescape the PCs had to revive the god Osiris who'd been cut up into bits by the god Set. Their task was to recover the various organs/body parts for Isis so a spell could be cast to revive Osiris. Just what each organ/body part was I played around with. I think the heart of Osiris was the high priestess of Isis, so there was the question "what happens to her when we revive him?" And then the skull of Osiris was a mimir (an actual talking skull). I also incorporated a lot of Egyptian mythology about death into the whole thing.
Olgar Shiverstone Awesome :)
scott2978 With your scenario, the biggest stumbling block I see is "why the hell would we do this Corellon?!?" I don't think you've yet given a convincing enough reason. I mean, drow are gathering to assault the surface; most players are going to go "Oh yeah? Let's get all our good allies together and kick their asses back to the darkness!" Why is Lolth needed? What can she do that another deity could not to stop the mounting invasion?
Also, I'd imagine other Seldarine (and good deities in general) wouldn't be too keen on Lolth's resurrection...of course, neither would Kiaransalee or Selvetarm. So in addition to the great advice above, I'd expect part of the PCs' quest would be getting support (or at least non-interference agreements) from the Seldarine / good temples.

Thursday, 24th April, 2014

As a player and a GM in both a PF and a D&D campaign, I can say that regardless of whether I buy 5e or not, I'm not going to change the game I'm playing for a long time. Plus, like a great many I plan to hold off from buying 5e until I see what the early adopters have to say about it. These are factors that a lot of folks seem to be missing. A significant portion of the market will be "late adopters", perhaps more than before given that many are no doubt gunshy after 4e. There might be a rush on 5e when it first hits shelves but that's not the full measure of the game. If a handful of the right people slam it in public, then the masses of sales from late adopters will never materialize. The sense that 5e is a foregone sales success is not really justified IMHO. Done poorly, the release of 5e could consign the D&D brand to a long period of mediocrity and possibly worse.Maybe.
I've never run 3e, PF or 4e but I've bought various bits and pieces from each, thinking (sometimes correctly) I could ...

Saturday, 8th March, 2014

Quite coincidentally, I was reading the book "Cheers, Gary" (a collection of ENWorld forum posts by Gary Gygax published in book form - you can read them yourself here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?22566-Q-amp-A-with-Gary-Gygax-Part-I) tonight and found this question asked of Gary Gygax about this exact subject (pp78).I know the book well. It's an interesting read with a mix of insight, humor, and sometimes doubt on my part. Not that anything in the book is deceptive, only that it's difficult to understand at times. And I know I can't remember that well to five years ago much less, what? I guess thirty? But Gary certainly demonstrates a good memory. Plus some amazing stories.
Here's his answer:
"As for alignment languages, as I worked up the mindsets for the none it seemed to me that each such groups would have developed their own patoise as a recognition means, more or less like secret societies have signs and signals to ID their fellows.
Never did I envisage character...

Friday, 7th March, 2014

I don't know much about 4e, but what's the difference between unaligned and neutral? Choosing an alignment that's not an alignment just sounds munchkin to me.
I know a guy who runs his 3.5 game with no alignments. It works for him most of the time but it takes constant reworking of the rules, and game balance is often skewed because alignment is also a game balance tool. With complex systems like 3.5 it's often a slippery slope changing things and alignment isn't as insignificant as it may seem at first.
Without getting too far off topic into a discussion of what alignments mean, I'll say it would be nice to have more definition in the rules as to just how to apply it to common situations. The ubiquitous scenario "Do you kill the baby orcs?" comes to mind.
But I digress... changing stuff, especially iconic stuff like alignment, so drastically in 4e does seem to be driving all the "does it still feel like D&D?" questions coming from 5e development. My playgroup didn't think about chan...

I don't know much about 4e, but what's the difference between unaligned and neutral? Choosing an alignment that's not an alignment just sounds munchkin to me.
Unaligned merely meant (under the 4e axis) you didn't necessarily adhere to good or evil. It was selfish, mercenary, and or disinterested. Unlike True Neutral, which wavered between "not choosing sides" and "keeper of balance", Unaligned just means you look out for you, your friends, your interests. You're not interested in the Greater Good, nor are you malevolent and cruel that defines Evil.
Unaligned appears to be back in Next, but its mostly reserved for things that don't have the intellectual capacity to make moral choices (animals, plants, constructs, oozes, animated undead, etc).

I don't know much about 4e, but what's the difference between unaligned and neutral? Choosing an alignment that's not an alignment just sounds munchkin to me.
I know a guy who runs his 3.5 game with no alignments. It works for him most of the time but it takes constant reworking of the rules, and game balance is often skewed because alignment is also a game balance tool. With complex systems like 3.5 it's often a slippery slope changing things and alignment isn't as insignificant as it may seem at first.
Without getting too far off topic into a discussion of what alignments mean, I'll say it would be nice to have more definition in the rules as to just how to apply it to common situations. The ubiquitous scenario "Do you kill the baby orcs?" comes to mind.
But I digress... changing stuff, especially iconic stuff like alignment, so drastically in 4e does seem to be driving all the "does it still feel like D&D?" questions coming from 5e development. My playgroup didn't think about changing e...

Sunday, 12th January, 2014

If you cast it under water, can you breathe normally, or is it filled with water? The spell description says you can breathe normally but I see room for interpretation.
As the spell description states, you can breathe normally. Presumably, the sphere pushes out from the creature's skin, displacing whatever the local environment is, creating a bubble filled with... well, with whatever it is that the creature breathes.
(I might be inclined to say "let the caster choose", were it not for 3e magic generally being overly powerful. Given that, and given that Otiluke's Resilient Sphere is primarily an offensive spell, my default is to apply the effect exactly as written, or as close as is possible.)

Monday, 5th August, 2013

Awesome poll Morrus, thanks for posting it. Great results. And I think it's interesting how many comments say they are both surprised and agree with the results.
Me, I'm just the other way round: I saw it coming, but I never gave a damn about Planescape myself :yawn:

Saturday, 27th July, 2013

This is EXACTLY why FR is among my least favorite settings to play in.What, no issue with its kitchen sink mentality or Mary Sue Elmunchkin? (The refusal to throw anything out hurt Eberron too, incidentally, when it could have been soooo cool.) I never had any run-ins with canon-obsessed fanboys, and since TSR chose to mess with the setting when it brought out 2e, I never thought anyone cared that much.

Wednesday, 17th July, 2013

Doesn't this make two former WOTC employees that Monte has stol... I mean lur... I mean... uh... employed?
Yeah, but that's just payback from when WotC stol... lur... I mean... uh... employed one Mike Mearls, who was formerly at Malhavoc. :)
Perhaps Mr. Cordell has seen a writing on the wall? With WotC's history of firing experienced staff on a nearly regular basis and with 18 years of employment on your personnel records there are worse ideas than to look around for interesting job opportunities.
I might be mistaken, but I was under the impression that the WotC severance package was relatively good? In which case, it would seem wiser to hold on, collect the money, and then go work for your friend.
Honestly, I wouldn't read anything into this. People leave companies all the time, and for all sorts of reasons. Maybe Bruce just wanted a change of scenery. Maybe he felt "my work here is done". Maybe...
But WotC's loss is Numenara's gain, it seems. I look forward to seeing what he comes up wit...

A Google+ comment two hours ago = "Welcome to Monte Cook Games".
Isn't that the 9th age?
They are friends from way back, so that would make sense.
Also interesting how the RPG industry has sort of gone back to...normal...with more mid-tier games and companies. But maybe that is another thread.

Thursday, 30th May, 2013

I would argue that it is.
Well, first off, you're discussing a report of gameplay. I'm talking about the gameplay itself. The act of playing the game (say, for argument's sake, we're talking about checkers) is unlikely to me to qualify as a work of art.
Second, there's many kinds of museum. A report of Julius Ceasar playing chess would certainly belong in a museum of history. But the account, though it tells us about people, does not necessarily qualify as something that ought to be in a museum of art.
You begin to see the sheer value of something as simple as what moves the man made during the game.
Sure, the information has value. But, information of value != art.

I would argue that it is.
I'm with you, Scott.
Chess masters will talk about artful and creative play when they talk about some players. And RPGs are nowhere near as rigid and structured as a chess board.
The trick is that there are choices to be made, and potential for surprising choices. Those surprising choices are an opportunity for creativity, and where that leads, you'll find some art going on.
-rg

Tuesday, 21st May, 2013

So my question to the hive mind is this: how would you rule an ooze becoming one again after being split up in combat? Only if your DM is feeling generous. Otherwise they become two oozes, usually with the same stats, HP, and attacks as the original ooze. :devil:

Thursday, 9th May, 2013

There are two answers to this. First, War bringer is correct, there's nothing about Dimensional Lock that implies one cannot teleport within the 1/2 mile radius you mentioned.
I'll disagree.
The first two sentences of the spell description state: "You create a shimmering emerald barrier that completely blocks extradimensional travel. Forms of movement barred include astral projection, blink, dimension door, ethereal jaunt, etherealness, gate, maze, plane shift, shadow walk, teleport, and similar spell-like or psionic abilities."
It doesn't matter where the far end of the transport spell is supposed to be, if the spell uses interdimensional travel, or even the possibility of it as an option (Shadow walk), and either end is in the affected ares, the spell fails.
(Note that Shadow Walk *can* be used to travel between dimensions, but its normal use only takes you to the edge of the Material plane where it borders with Shadow. It doesn't normally cross that line.)
And since it bars "similar spe...

Tuesday, 29th January, 2013

Actually I doubt that shrinking a shed would be the same as shrinking a solid block of metal shaped like a shed like you're suggesting. The volume of the actual shed item is far less than the volume of space contained within it's walls. That being the case it's still arguable whether enough volume could be shrunk to shrink an average shed.
That is true, and I think if you were able to make it a modular flat-packed construction you might manage to get it compact enough for 3-4 separate castings to handle.
Is it just me or does the 20th level wizard that cant shrink a shed make D&D magic seem really lame? Cloning, space travel, death beams, creating new planes of existence and twisting reality itself is ok, but making your shed smaller is out of the question?
Well, making your shed smaller with Shrink Object is tricky, but that's not the spell I'd use as a 20th-level wizard. Polymorph Any Object is a great deal more versatile, and has a far more generous size limit of 100 cubic feet per leve...

Saturday, 26th January, 2013

You could use the Shrink Item spell. If your workshop is a small, free standing structure, like a tool shed, a reasonably low level wizard could shrink it.
A 10th level wizard could shrink a 20 cubic foot "workshop" shed to a patch of cloth about 16 inches wide, fold it up and put it in his pocket.
Sorry, but I think you may be mixing up your cubic feet with your feet cubed.
A 5 feet cubed item (i.e. an item 5 feet x 5 feet x 5 feet, equivalent to the fighting space of a Medium creature) contains a number of cubic feet equal to 5 times 5 times 5 - that's 125 cubic feet, just for a tiny room a human couldn't even stand up in. Well beyond even a 20th-level caster's limit of 40 cubic feet, I'm afraid.

You could use the Shrink Item spell. If your workshop is a small, free standing structure, like a tool shed, a reasonably low level wizard could shrink it.
A 10th level wizard could shrink a 20 cubic foot "workshop" shed to a patch of cloth about 16 inches wide, fold it up and put it in his pocket. It would stay that way for 10 days, or until he tosses it on the ground or gives a command word. Since Shrink Item is a 3rd level wizard spell it would be pretty easy to re-prepare the spell every couple weeks, or just make it permanent with the Permanency spell. You might need to ok it with your DM that all the shed's contents shrink with it, but even if not you can carry them around in a wagon, set up shop as part of normal daily camping duties, and pack up after last watch. Plus it gives the whole group a safer place to sleep that can be well secured with magic and is very safe from the elements and inclement weather.
Just watch out for antimagic fields ;)
Scott
Now This idea has Merit!